Appeal No. 1997-1486
Application 08/430,752
Even disregarding the aforementioned issue, the
rejections formulated by the examiner still would be improper.
This is because the examiner has advanced no acceptable
rationale why an artisan with ordinary skill would combine the
here applied references in the manner proposed. For example,
the examiner has offered no rational, acceptable reasons, and
we perceive none independently, why an artisan with ordinary
skill would modify the contact lens of Ikushima to have the
hole density and angle features said to be disclosed by
Grendahl and the thickness feature said to be disclosed by
Higashimura or the angle features taught by Legras. Indeed,
on the record before us, it is not even clear whether a
contact lens would be capable of functioning as such if
modified to possess these features.
In light of the foregoing, we are convinced that the
examiner's rejections are fatally based upon impermissible
hindsight derived from the appellants' own disclosure rather
than some teaching, suggestion, or incentive derived from the
applied prior art. It follows that we cannot sustain the
examiner's
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007